There is a large difference in words being powerful and a message being powerful what you are talking about with the gays being called faggots there is no true harm in that it was the suggestion that they should be harmed that followed and included no harmful words on their own words in and of themselves are harmless its the way people use those words that has power its the same thing as the old guns dont kill people people with guns kill people idea. You imply that the person making those awful comments should be silenced to prevent harm but the truth is in a free society he should have the right to say whatever the hell he wants its isnt even him thats doing the real damage its the morons that listen to him and take him literally they are the ones who are dangerous we must stop protecting the easily duped masses and teach them to make better choices in life. I believe firmly in the free trade of ideas even if those ideas are ridiculously stupid after all stupid ideas are what make great ideas stand out.
I don't think what you're saying is very relevant. I was trying to draw the lines between the type of language that is considered obscene but doesn't actually cause harm, and the kind of language that could potentially hurt, either physically or emotionally
( ... )
Right, words in themselves contain no innate harm. HOWEVER, the power of words is not wholly in how people hear or interpret the words. The intent of the words is almost more important than any dictionary meaning, and the intent is carried and generated by the speaker.
You cannot absolve the speaker of all blame when they say any word with the intent of causing some kind of harm.
Yes, he has the right to say whatever he wants, but in order for a society to work, people are not "allowed" to intentionally cause harm to another, through speech, actions, art, whatever - and thus we have unspoken (but enforced) rules.
Gays have reclaimed the word "queer", so their listening empowers them to change the meaning and protect themselves from being hurt by those who intend to cause harm by using something that they perceive as a derogatory or degrading term, but this doesn't work across the board.
Words can still hurt if the intent for harm is there.
i think another issue is that comedy central won't broadcast a black person saying kike or a jewish person saying nigger because then someone can take a clip of it and broadcast it out of context on other channels and make it seem as if comedy central is a bigot channel.
Well, I think we can bet he's neither gay nor Hispanic, and yet he said fagot and spic. Apparently that isn't the issue. The issue is the FCC list of forbidden words.
Reply
Reply
You cannot absolve the speaker of all blame when they say any word with the intent of causing some kind of harm.
Yes, he has the right to say whatever he wants, but in order for a society to work, people are not "allowed" to intentionally cause harm to another, through speech, actions, art, whatever - and thus we have unspoken (but enforced) rules.
Gays have reclaimed the word "queer", so their listening empowers them to change the meaning and protect themselves from being hurt by those who intend to cause harm by using something that they perceive as a derogatory or degrading term, but this doesn't work across the board.
Words can still hurt if the intent for harm is there.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment